Most people believe that to remain silent on any illegal or unethical practice, especially when incontrovertible evidence indicates illegal or unethical behavior, is to be complicit. The practice of remaining silent when one knows that possible illegal and certainly unethical behavior is going on - is complicity by silence.
When people know the difference between right and wrong, ethical and unethical, and even legal and illegal - but sit idly by or say nothing when they see unethical or illegal actions - inaction or silence can mean complicity. Many public school teachers, officials, and supporters have not sat idly by or remained silent while Epic Virtual and Blended school owners have become millionaires at Oklahoma tax payer expense. These teachers and education supporters have openly voiced their opposition to the Epic racketeering going on in our state, and have stood up to the unethical and illegal activities. They (teachers and public school supporters) can do very little about the problem, but still call it out for what it is.
While teachers and other public school employees usually aren't listened to when they object to illegal or unethical behavior by Epic Virtual or Blended Public School owners, there are a few entities such as law enforcement and prosecuting attorneys who are listened to. When the questioned behavior is unethical, but not illegal, it often falls upon our state lawmakers and other elected public officials (Senators and Representatives) to voice concern and ask the hard questions.
Senator Ron Sharp (R) of Shawnee is one such lawmaker who is not afraid to stand up for the public interest and demand answers from Epic. He continues to demand answers from Epic, and even from his fellow lawmakers - many of whom have chosen to remain silent, concerning the alleged misappropriation of tax payer funds. According to Senator Sharp, about $11.2 million in tax payer dollars has flown out the door - going to the owners of Epic, instead of to Oklahoma students. Since Oklahoma senators and representatives are in charge of overseeing how tax dollars are spent and not squandered, it stands to reason that lawmakers would be upset at how this waste of money has been allowed to go on. Senator Sharp has faced the wrath of Epic, however, as it has hired private investigators to "dig up dirt", threatened his job by encouraging Senate leadership to "fire" him, and threatened lawsuits for "slandering" Epic owners. Senator Sharp is alone in asking the tough questions and demanding answers in behalf of Oklahoma tax payers, because many other lawmakers are evidently complicit with Epic in their silence.
This "complicity by silence" is not a fact, however, until those lawmakers have been given the opportunity to voice their opinion. Senator Ron Sharp does not represent my home district, so it may only be fair to give my senator and representative a chance to speak their opinions and protect Oklahoma tax dollars which should be going to Oklahoma students. Senator Paul Scott (R) of Duncan and Representative Cindy Roe (R) of Lindsay are my local lawmakers. Since Epic opened a school in Blanchard several weeks ago, I think it only fair to give both lawmakers a chance to comment. I plan on asking these tough questions of both Roe and Scott at a legislative meeting for educators on November 21 in Wayne, Oklahoma. It will be interesting to hear their answers to some very political questions. I'll publish the responses in this post after November 21.
Thursday, October 17, 2019
Tuesday, October 15, 2019
OSSAA Competitive Equity Plan
The OSSAA's plan to revise Rule 14 to promote competitive equity in the OSSAA falls woefully short of accomplishing its goal. An 'OSSAA appointed' committee was charged with studying the competitive equity issue about eight months ago. They were further charged with coming up with a plan which will promote competitive equity for all member schools.
Before we take a look at the OSSAA's recommendations for "tweaking" Rule 14 to level the playing field for all schools, let's look at the Oklahoma high school football rankings this year as a way of determining the effectiveness of Rule 14 for promoting competitive equity. Only about 6% (20 of 337) of the total member schools which participate in football are 'private', which leaves 94% 'public'. There are six classifications in which both public and private schools participate: 5A, 3A, 2A, A, B, and C. No private schools participate in classes 6A and 4A football. The high school football class rankings according to the Daily Oklahoman after seven weeks into the season include:
Class 5A - Bishop McGuinness #1
Class 3A - Heritage Hall #1, Lincoln Christian #2
Class 2A - Metro Christian #1
Class A - Rejoice Christian #2
Class B - Regent Prep #2
Class C - Southwest Covenant #1
Only time will tell as to how many private school state champions will be crowned in December, but there is a good chance that a private school state champion will be crowned in all classes in which they participate. The fact that private schools make up only about 6% of the total participants indicates that Rule 14 has been a total bust for promoting competitive equity in the OSSAA.
Further evidence that Rule 14 (implemented in 2012) has not been effective for leveling the playing field in football, is collected when we examine the final rankings for high school football in 2011 (one year prior to implemention of Rule 14 for competitive equity):
Class 5A - Bishop Kelly - top 8 (beaten in the 2011 state quarter-finals)
Class 4A - Bishop McGuinness - top 4 (beaten in the state semi-finals)
Class 3A - Cascia Hall #2
Class 2A - Lincoln Christian - top 8 (beaten in the state quarter-finals)
Class A - No private schools
Class B - No private schools
Class C - No private schools
As noted in state news a few weeks ago - the OSSAA has not been very good at gathering 'athlete concussion' data and analyzing that data in solving this student health crisis. The OSSAA has publicly stated that it's waiting for Texas UIL to study the problem before addressing it. It comes as no great shock that the OSSAA would 'drag its feet' in addressing the public/private competitive equity issue, if it has done the same thing for much more serious problems.
The OSSAA committee assigned to study the competitive equity issue and form a solution to the problem, listed one research article - "National Review of Interscholastic Competitive Balance Solutions Related to the Public-Private Debate" Volume 1, Issue 1, 2015 of the JOURNAL OF AMATEUR SPORT. The research document noted several methods by which state athletic associations have attempted to level the playing field for both public and private schools, including enrollment "multipliers" and "advancement" rules similar to Oklahoma. The research indicated, however, that most, if not all these enrollment based rules have failed to promote competitive equity. The document goes on to relate that "separate playoffs" for public and private schools is the "... only competitive balance solution to eliminate the public vs. private issue by isolating private schools to separate playoffs" (page 41). One must bear in mind that the OSSAA touted this research when devising its own competitive equity solution.
So, just what is the OSSAA's new competitive equity plan for leveling the playing field for all members? We've not seen it in print just yet, but a report by the competitive equity committee entails that it involves bumping the top four finishers in class 5A volleyball and tennis, to class 6A. To many OSSAA member schools, this plan looks like some sort of convoluted joke.
There are five private school volleyball teams in class 5A and twenty-seven public school teams. All five finished in the top eight, which means that two teams will move up to class 6A. (Three of the five were already playing up a class, so may not advance to class 6A.) The two lowest ADM class 6A volleyball teams will then 'bump down' to 5A, to replace the two 5A teams which advanced to 6A.
In related news, the NCAA has announced that it will create another division for college sports. In addition to Division I, II, and III for athletic competition levels based on scholarships and ability to recruit - there will now be Division IV, for those colleges which have a lot of 'out-of-state' players. It has been suggested that those schools such as the University of Oklahoma, which have a lot of 'move-ins', have an unfair advantage over those schools which do not (like Texas and USC). According to the NCAA, a large number of 'move-in' athletes does not promote competitive equity. Of course, this is fake news, and asinine for the NCAA to ever consider.
It was suggested to the OSSAA membership by an OSSAA official, however, that 'move-ins' create a tilted playing field in competition between member schools. In other words, competitive equity cannot be achieved without considering the number of 'move-in' players a team has. The official even provided my school as an example. I believe the official knows this is a ridiculous factor to consider when promoting competitive equity, but simply used it as a distraction from the real factors (providing student financial assistance and restricted enrollment). The same OSSAA official claimed we have published misleading, inaccurate, or emotionally charged information in the data above.
Update - October 31, 2019: We attended the OSSAA regional meeting at Westmoore high school. The OSSAA's plan for tweaking Rule 14 (Competitive Equity) involves advancing the top four finishers in 5A volleyball and tennis to class 6A, just as we expected. The class 6A traditional public schools in attendance were unhappy with the OSSAA suggestion. They believe that this new Rule 14 will lead to a "super-class" of volleyball and tennis teams in the OSSAA. The OSSAA's response was that there is already a super-class in class 5A, indicating that we'll now have two super-classes for volleyball. The OSSAA indicated it will probably send the new competitive equity plan out to vote of the membership, but there are many class 6A schools which will vote 'No', and countless other schools which will vote 'No', because the new Rule 14 tweaker does nothing to address the real problem - competitive equity in the OSSAA. In fact, the OSSAA's analysis of the data indicates that the competitive equity problem has been solved for all other sports. The competitive equity problem for member schools has not been solved for any sports!
Update - November 13, 2019: For the 2019 football playoffs, fifteen of the twenty private schools made the playoffs, or 75%. Only about 52% of the public schools are playoff bound.
Before we take a look at the OSSAA's recommendations for "tweaking" Rule 14 to level the playing field for all schools, let's look at the Oklahoma high school football rankings this year as a way of determining the effectiveness of Rule 14 for promoting competitive equity. Only about 6% (20 of 337) of the total member schools which participate in football are 'private', which leaves 94% 'public'. There are six classifications in which both public and private schools participate: 5A, 3A, 2A, A, B, and C. No private schools participate in classes 6A and 4A football. The high school football class rankings according to the Daily Oklahoman after seven weeks into the season include:
Class 5A - Bishop McGuinness #1
Class 3A - Heritage Hall #1, Lincoln Christian #2
Class 2A - Metro Christian #1
Class A - Rejoice Christian #2
Class B - Regent Prep #2
Class C - Southwest Covenant #1
Only time will tell as to how many private school state champions will be crowned in December, but there is a good chance that a private school state champion will be crowned in all classes in which they participate. The fact that private schools make up only about 6% of the total participants indicates that Rule 14 has been a total bust for promoting competitive equity in the OSSAA.
Further evidence that Rule 14 (implemented in 2012) has not been effective for leveling the playing field in football, is collected when we examine the final rankings for high school football in 2011 (one year prior to implemention of Rule 14 for competitive equity):
Class 5A - Bishop Kelly - top 8 (beaten in the 2011 state quarter-finals)
Class 4A - Bishop McGuinness - top 4 (beaten in the state semi-finals)
Class 3A - Cascia Hall #2
Class 2A - Lincoln Christian - top 8 (beaten in the state quarter-finals)
Class A - No private schools
Class B - No private schools
Class C - No private schools
As noted in state news a few weeks ago - the OSSAA has not been very good at gathering 'athlete concussion' data and analyzing that data in solving this student health crisis. The OSSAA has publicly stated that it's waiting for Texas UIL to study the problem before addressing it. It comes as no great shock that the OSSAA would 'drag its feet' in addressing the public/private competitive equity issue, if it has done the same thing for much more serious problems.
The OSSAA committee assigned to study the competitive equity issue and form a solution to the problem, listed one research article - "National Review of Interscholastic Competitive Balance Solutions Related to the Public-Private Debate" Volume 1, Issue 1, 2015 of the JOURNAL OF AMATEUR SPORT. The research document noted several methods by which state athletic associations have attempted to level the playing field for both public and private schools, including enrollment "multipliers" and "advancement" rules similar to Oklahoma. The research indicated, however, that most, if not all these enrollment based rules have failed to promote competitive equity. The document goes on to relate that "separate playoffs" for public and private schools is the "... only competitive balance solution to eliminate the public vs. private issue by isolating private schools to separate playoffs" (page 41). One must bear in mind that the OSSAA touted this research when devising its own competitive equity solution.
So, just what is the OSSAA's new competitive equity plan for leveling the playing field for all members? We've not seen it in print just yet, but a report by the competitive equity committee entails that it involves bumping the top four finishers in class 5A volleyball and tennis, to class 6A. To many OSSAA member schools, this plan looks like some sort of convoluted joke.
There are five private school volleyball teams in class 5A and twenty-seven public school teams. All five finished in the top eight, which means that two teams will move up to class 6A. (Three of the five were already playing up a class, so may not advance to class 6A.) The two lowest ADM class 6A volleyball teams will then 'bump down' to 5A, to replace the two 5A teams which advanced to 6A.
In related news, the NCAA has announced that it will create another division for college sports. In addition to Division I, II, and III for athletic competition levels based on scholarships and ability to recruit - there will now be Division IV, for those colleges which have a lot of 'out-of-state' players. It has been suggested that those schools such as the University of Oklahoma, which have a lot of 'move-ins', have an unfair advantage over those schools which do not (like Texas and USC). According to the NCAA, a large number of 'move-in' athletes does not promote competitive equity. Of course, this is fake news, and asinine for the NCAA to ever consider.
It was suggested to the OSSAA membership by an OSSAA official, however, that 'move-ins' create a tilted playing field in competition between member schools. In other words, competitive equity cannot be achieved without considering the number of 'move-in' players a team has. The official even provided my school as an example. I believe the official knows this is a ridiculous factor to consider when promoting competitive equity, but simply used it as a distraction from the real factors (providing student financial assistance and restricted enrollment). The same OSSAA official claimed we have published misleading, inaccurate, or emotionally charged information in the data above.
Update - October 31, 2019: We attended the OSSAA regional meeting at Westmoore high school. The OSSAA's plan for tweaking Rule 14 (Competitive Equity) involves advancing the top four finishers in 5A volleyball and tennis to class 6A, just as we expected. The class 6A traditional public schools in attendance were unhappy with the OSSAA suggestion. They believe that this new Rule 14 will lead to a "super-class" of volleyball and tennis teams in the OSSAA. The OSSAA's response was that there is already a super-class in class 5A, indicating that we'll now have two super-classes for volleyball. The OSSAA indicated it will probably send the new competitive equity plan out to vote of the membership, but there are many class 6A schools which will vote 'No', and countless other schools which will vote 'No', because the new Rule 14 tweaker does nothing to address the real problem - competitive equity in the OSSAA. In fact, the OSSAA's analysis of the data indicates that the competitive equity problem has been solved for all other sports. The competitive equity problem for member schools has not been solved for any sports!
Update - November 13, 2019: For the 2019 football playoffs, fifteen of the twenty private schools made the playoffs, or 75%. Only about 52% of the public schools are playoff bound.
Monday, October 14, 2019
Life Perspectives - George and Alpha
I often espouse my opinions and lament about public school issues in this column, but sometimes relate personal views and perspectives of events which have affected us all at one time or another. Every now and then something happens to each of us which causes a realignment of what is really important in life. It seems that those life-changing events happen at a faster rate when we get older. Twenty-five years ago, my twelve year old nephew, Austin Beckham, tragically died from an accidental gunshot. I still haven't fully recovered. The child's father (my brother) hasn't either, but he was the strongest I've ever seen in dealing with this tragedy.
I suppose some people have such an inner strength and faith, that they actually become stronger when faced with adversity. Such is the case of my brother... and Glenn Floyd, who lost two young daughters in a house fire in the 1970's. I asked both my brother and Glenn how they recovered from such a personal tragedy, and their answers were the same - Faith in God and work. People also must have another reason to continue on, and its usually for others. In other words, when something tragically happens to a loved one, most people actually become stronger and more faithful for their loved ones still around them. It is when this reason for living disappears, that many couples leave us at the same time.
George Ingram, my brother-in-law, was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer about three months ago. A pancreatic cancer diagnosis is most often a death sentence in the majority of cases, but George fought valiantly with the help of his wife Alpha. Unfortunately, George succumbed to the disease at the end of September. The battle was gut-wrenching for George as well as Alpha, and it took its toll on her. George was 63 at the time of his passing, and Alpha was 58 (still young by my standards).
On Wednesday, October 2, 2019, a neighbor found Alpha unresponsive in her home. She was transported to the hospital and placed in intensive care. My wife Sherrie (Alpha's sister) went to the hospital to support Alpha. Sherrie stayed with her for several days. The next week, on Tuesday evening, as Sherrie was taking a break to eat, Alpha called her from the hospital and said she was dying. Sherrie rushed back to the hospital to see Alpha and try to comfort her. That night, Alpha "coded" and became comatose. The doctors and nurses did everything they could over the next several hours to save her, but at around 10 AM on October 9 - they decided that they could only make her comfortable during her last few hours. Sherrie asked them to stop extraordinary life-support at around 12:50 PM. Alpha left us at 1 PM on October 9, and is now with her husband George - where she always wanted to be.
I suppose some people have such an inner strength and faith, that they actually become stronger when faced with adversity. Such is the case of my brother... and Glenn Floyd, who lost two young daughters in a house fire in the 1970's. I asked both my brother and Glenn how they recovered from such a personal tragedy, and their answers were the same - Faith in God and work. People also must have another reason to continue on, and its usually for others. In other words, when something tragically happens to a loved one, most people actually become stronger and more faithful for their loved ones still around them. It is when this reason for living disappears, that many couples leave us at the same time.
George Ingram, my brother-in-law, was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer about three months ago. A pancreatic cancer diagnosis is most often a death sentence in the majority of cases, but George fought valiantly with the help of his wife Alpha. Unfortunately, George succumbed to the disease at the end of September. The battle was gut-wrenching for George as well as Alpha, and it took its toll on her. George was 63 at the time of his passing, and Alpha was 58 (still young by my standards).
On Wednesday, October 2, 2019, a neighbor found Alpha unresponsive in her home. She was transported to the hospital and placed in intensive care. My wife Sherrie (Alpha's sister) went to the hospital to support Alpha. Sherrie stayed with her for several days. The next week, on Tuesday evening, as Sherrie was taking a break to eat, Alpha called her from the hospital and said she was dying. Sherrie rushed back to the hospital to see Alpha and try to comfort her. That night, Alpha "coded" and became comatose. The doctors and nurses did everything they could over the next several hours to save her, but at around 10 AM on October 9 - they decided that they could only make her comfortable during her last few hours. Sherrie asked them to stop extraordinary life-support at around 12:50 PM. Alpha left us at 1 PM on October 9, and is now with her husband George - where she always wanted to be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)